This blog posting represents the views of the author, David Fosberry. Those opinions may change over time. They do not constitute an expert legal or financial opinion.
If you have comments on this blog posting, please email me .
The Opinion Blog is organised by threads, so each post is identified by a thread number ("Major" index) and a post number ("Minor" index). If you want to view the index of blogs, click here to download it as an Excel spreadsheet.
Click here to see the whole Opinion Blog.
To view, save, share or refer to a particular blog post, use the link in that post (below/right, where it says "Show only this post").
Posted on 8th February 2023 |
Show only this post Show all posts in this thread (Tax). |
|
I recently saw a report on the BBC (actually not relevant to this post) about layoffs and layoff anxiety, which got me thinking more about my previous post in this thread about trickle-down economics. Layoffs primarily happen to lower paid staff, and produce trickle-down impacts in reverse: people lose their income, so they spend less, meaning other people (shop owners, online retailers, service providers such as telecommunications companies, and the like) have reduced income. Governments also have reduced tax revenue. All this means that the impact of one layoff is actually much larger than it at first appears. It also means that the cost/benefit case for government intervention to prevent layoffs is stronger than governments are willing to admit. I think it is time that some unbiased independent financial analysis was applied to the rationale from companies and governments for layoffs. | |